"BLafferty" <Brian@nowhere.com> wrote in message news:jO-dnXlW_vxakg3RnZ2dnUVZ_vGdnZ2d@giganews.com...> On 9/14/2010 8:11 PM, Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:>> My apologies; Cyclingnews didn't say the site had been "hacked" but>> rather "hijacked" and that, in fact, is an appropriate description.>>>> --Mike Jacoubowsky>> Chain Reaction Bicycles>> www.ChainReaction.com>> Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA>> And this is news? Must be a really slow day at CyclingNews central.

Brian: Serious question. Do you think the motivations of those putting up that site are genuine, that they could be so naive that they wouldn't expect the comments they've gotten? That seems pretty unlikely to me. I don't even allow unmoderated comments on my own site, and I certainly wouldn't attract the audience this one does.

On Sep 14, 8:26 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <Mi...@ChainReaction.com>wrote:> "BLafferty" <Br...@nowhere.com> wrote in message>> news:jO-dnXlW_vxakg3RnZ2dnUVZ_vGdnZ2d@giganews.com...>> > On 9/14/2010 8:11 PM, Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:> >> My apologies; Cyclingnews didn't say the site had been "hacked" but> >> rather "hijacked" and that, in fact, is an appropriate description.>> >> --Mike Jacoubowsky> >> Chain Reaction Bicycles> >>www.ChainReaction.com> >> Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA>> > And this is news? Must be a really slow day at CyclingNews central.>> Brian: Serious question. Do you think the motivations of those putting up> that site are genuine, that they could be so naive that they wouldn't expect> the comments they've gotten? That seems pretty unlikely to me. I don't even> allow unmoderated comments on my own site, and I certainly wouldn't attract> the audience this one does.>> --Mike Jacoubowsky> Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReaction.com> Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

Brian doesn't like serious questions that challenge his view of theworld.

It's a shame to lose one of our best customers. We have no idea whatto do with all of this EPO now that you've quit riding.

Sneaky Fox and Pepsi Frank

PS: give us call when you need that new kidney. We know all of thedrugs have been hard on your organs.

== 7 of 10 ==Date: Tues, Sep 14 2010 6:51 pm From: LawBoy01

On Sep 14, 8:43 pm, Anton Berlin <truth_88...@yahoo.com> wrote:> I tried to post but it's moderated now>> ***************************************************************************­**************************************>> It's a shame to lose one of our best customers. We have no idea what> to do with all of this EPO now that you've quit riding.>> Sneaky Fox and Pepsi Frank>> PS: give us call when you need that new kidney. We know all of the> drugs have been hard on your organs.

> On Sep 14, 8:13 pm, BLafferty <Br...@nowhere.com> wrote:> >> > And this is news? Must be a really slow day at CyclingNews central.> > I am literally rolling on the floor laughing

This must be one of those "laughing at, not laughing with" situations.

== 9 of 10 ==Date: Tues, Sep 14 2010 8:46 pm From: Brad Anders

On Sep 14, 6:43 pm, Anton Berlin <truth_88...@yahoo.com> wrote:> I tried to post but it's moderated now>> *****************************************************************************************************************>> It's a shame to lose one of our best customers. We have no idea what> to do with all of this EPO now that you've quit riding.>> Sneaky Fox and Pepsi Frank>> PS: give us call when you need that new kidney. We know all of the> drugs have been hard on your organs.

On 9/14/2010 4:56 PM, LawBoy01 wrote:> On Sep 14, 2:59 pm, BLafferty<Br...@nowhere.com> wrote:>> On 9/14/2010 3:30 PM, LawBoy01 wrote:>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 14, 12:39 pm, BLafferty<Br...@nowhere.com> wrote:>>>> On 9/14/2010 1:28 PM, LawBoy01 wrote:>>>>>>> On Sep 14, 12:12 pm, BLafferty<Br...@nowhere.com> wrote:>>>>>> On 9/14/2010 1:01 PM, LawBoy01 wrote:>>>>>>>>> On Sep 14, 11:56 am, LawBoy01<phi...@pwm-law.com> wrote:>>>>>>>> On Sep 14, 11:31 am, Magilla Gorilla<m.gori...@sandiegozoo.org>>>>>>>>> wrote:>>>>>>>>>>> LawBoy01 wrote:>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 13, 9:27 pm, Magilla Gorilla<m.gori...@sandiegozoo.org> wrote:>>>>>>>>>>> Just because a jury of GEDs didn't find him>>>>>>>>>>> guilty doesn't mean Jack to me.>>>>>>>>>>>> And some "anonymous" fuckwit's hate filled diatribe doesn't mean>>>>>>>>>> anything to Lance.>>>>>>>>>>> Lance hates people who expose him for doping. He calls their employer>>>>>>>>> and tries to get them fired. Is that the hate you're talking about?>>>>>>>>>>> Magilla>>>>>>>>>> Also, why can't I ever find an article where Frankie says "Fuck you,>>>>>>>> Lance. You got me fired?" Do you expect Frankie to testify to that>>>>>>>> in court?>>>>>>>>> Ever wonder WHY you don't hear Frankie say that? Maybe because he>>>>>>> could get sued for libel/slander. Oh, why did Frankie get fired from>>>>>>> Rock Racing? Surely not because he has a moral objection to doping.>>>>>>>> Do you really think Armstrong is going to sue anyone in this country for>>>>>> defamation? Frankie has already testified that he heard Armstrong admit>>>>>> that he was a doper. He's stated publicly that he had doping>>>>>> discussions with Armstrong while training. Has Armstrong sued him? No.>>>>>> Why? Because the last thing Armstrong wants is Betsy guiding Frankie>>>>>> through discovery in litigation.>>>>>>>> Don't you have a complaint to draft in a PI action?- Hide quoted text ->>>>>>>> - Show quoted text ->>>>>>> Why doesn't Frankie come out and say hey Lance, you got me fired!>>>>>> Why should he? It's not in his interest to do that right now.- Hide quoted text ->>>>>> - Show quoted text ->>>>> Why isn't it in his interests?>>>> You're a "lawyer." Try to figure it out on your own.- Hide quoted text ->>>> - Show quoted text ->> Brian,>> You're a washed up has been hater with nothing to do but jackoff and> play chess.>> Ciao,>> Philip

What's wrong with jacking off and playing chess--not at the same time of course, unless it involves correspondence chess in which case you have to be careful to not have the post cards sticking together.

== 2 of 3 ==Date: Tues, Sep 14 2010 5:46 pm From: LawBoy01

On Sep 14, 7:12 pm, BLafferty <Br...@nowhere.com> wrote:> On 9/14/2010 4:56 PM, LawBoy01 wrote:>>>>>> > On Sep 14, 2:59 pm, BLafferty<Br...@nowhere.com> wrote:> >> On 9/14/2010 3:30 PM, LawBoy01 wrote:>> >>> On Sep 14, 12:39 pm, BLafferty<Br...@nowhere.com> wrote:> >>>> On 9/14/2010 1:28 PM, LawBoy01 wrote:>> >>>>> On Sep 14, 12:12 pm, BLafferty<Br...@nowhere.com> wrote:> >>>>>> On 9/14/2010 1:01 PM, LawBoy01 wrote:>> >>>>>>> On Sep 14, 11:56 am, LawBoy01<phi...@pwm-law.com> wrote:> >>>>>>>> On Sep 14, 11:31 am, Magilla Gorilla<m.gori...@sandiegozoo.org>> >>>>>>>> wrote:>> >>>>>>>>> LawBoy01 wrote:> >>>>>>>>>> On Sep 13, 9:27 pm, Magilla Gorilla<m.gori...@sandiegozoo.org> wrote:> >>>>>>>>>>> Just because a jury of GEDs didn't find him> >>>>>>>>>>> guilty doesn't mean Jack to me.>> >>>>>>>>>> And some "anonymous" fuckwit's hate filled diatribe doesn't mean> >>>>>>>>>> anything to Lance.>> >>>>>>>>> Lance hates people who expose him for doping. He calls their employer> >>>>>>>>> and tries to get them fired. Is that the hate you're talking about?>> >>>>>>>>> Magilla>> >>>>>>>> Also, why can't I ever find an article where Frankie says "Fuck you,> >>>>>>>> Lance. You got me fired?" Do you expect Frankie to testify to that> >>>>>>>> in court?>> >>>>>>> Ever wonder WHY you don't hear Frankie say that? Maybe because he> >>>>>>> could get sued for libel/slander. Oh, why did Frankie get fired from> >>>>>>> Rock Racing? Surely not because he has a moral objection to doping.>> >>>>>> Do you really think Armstrong is going to sue anyone in this country for> >>>>>> defamation? Frankie has already testified that he heard Armstrong admit> >>>>>> that he was a doper. He's stated publicly that he had doping> >>>>>> discussions with Armstrong while training. Has Armstrong sued him? No.> >>>>>> Why? Because the last thing Armstrong wants is Betsy guiding Frankie> >>>>>> through discovery in litigation.>> >>>>>> Don't you have a complaint to draft in a PI action?- Hide quoted text ->> >>>>>> - Show quoted text ->> >>>>> Why doesn't Frankie come out and say hey Lance, you got me fired!>> >>>> Why should he? It's not in his interest to do that right now.- Hide quoted text ->> >>>> - Show quoted text ->> >>> Why isn't it in his interests?>> >> You're a "lawyer." Try to figure it out on your own.- Hide quoted text ->> >> - Show quoted text ->> > Brian,>> > You're a washed up has been hater with nothing to do but jackoff and> > play chess.>> > Ciao,>> > Philip>> What's wrong with jacking off and playing chess--not at the same time of> course, unless it involves correspondence chess in which case you have> to be careful to not have the post cards sticking together.- Hide quoted text ->> - Show quoted text -

That was funny. Really, it was.

== 3 of 3 ==Date: Tues, Sep 14 2010 7:12 pm From: LawBoy01

On Sep 14, 2:07 pm, Magilla Gorilla <m.gori...@sandiegozoo.org> wrote:> Kurgan Gringioni wrote:> > "Magilla Gorilla" <m.gori...@sandiegozoo.org> wrote in message> >news:4C8FA37A.9AEFB2EE@sandiegozoo.org...> > : LawBoy01 wrote:> > :> > : > On Sep 13, 9:27 pm, Magilla Gorilla <m.gori...@sandiegozoo.org> wrote:> > : > >Just because a jury of GEDs didn't find him> > : > > guilty doesn't mean Jack to me.> > : >> > : > And some "anonymous" fuckwit's hate filled diatribe doesn't mean> > : > anything to Lance.> > :> > : Lance hates people who expose him for doping. He calls their employer> > : and tries to get them fired. Is that the hate you're talking about?>> > Dumbass ->> > If I was LANCE, I'd try to get Frankie fired.>> > Dude was having a conversation with his doctor while on his deathbed.> > Shouldn't be repeating that shit. Frankie was there because ostensibly he> > was supposed to be his friend.>> > thanks,>> > Kurgan. presented by Gringioni.>> I agree with you. But the question is would you perjure yourself under> oath?>> And the real question is would you perjure yourself to protect an EX-friend> who you also didn't like?>> Magilla- Hide quoted text ->> - Show quoted text -

Magilla,

Please explain in your own words what Frankie and Betsy have to sayhurts Lance in the case in which he's been sued by Floyd Landis?

The Cliff Bar wrapper blowing away is awesome. That's like somethingout of a Euro art film.

== 2 of 6 ==Date: Tues, Sep 14 2010 8:10 pm From: --D-y

On Sep 14, 4:43 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <Mi...@ChainReaction.com>wrote:> Impressive that rbr, when asked a serious question that many of us deal with> on a regular basis, can really get behind it in a serious way. Thank you all> for the thoughtful responses, and reminding me why I don't do large group> rides anymore.>> For the slower folk complaining about being scared when overtaken by a large> group of cyclists, I'm suggesting they use ding-ding bells. I'm thinking the> sound carries a fair amount and might warn people who can't see them (before> it's too late) that there's something ahead to watch out for.>> In the past, I've always assumed the ding-ding bells were to let others know> you were passing them, but I'm seeing things a bit differently now. It's> that last half of a large group that you have to be scared of.

People in front need to point (up high) and vocalize-- "Riders Up!!!"and swing wide in a safe manner while calling out "Passing on yourleft, please!.The people in the back need to keep their heads up and ears open, andpass other riders with plenty of room to spare, not treat them likepylons.

Ride like a grown-up, including taking responsibility for others'safety.--D-y

== 3 of 6 ==Date: Tues, Sep 14 2010 8:55 pm From: Fred

On Sep 14, 11:53 am, Marco <marco.fanell...@gmail.com> wrote:> Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:> > We're seeing an increase in animosity between cyclists and> > motorists/residents in our area, and now, faster cyclists vs slower.> > Something that recently came up is that, when a very large fast-moving pack> > overtakes a slower rider, and the lead part of the pack does a great job of> > giving the slower folk room, but by the time the rear of the group comes> > around, the message (hand signals, "rider up", whatever) has been lost, and> > the slower folk sometimes get clipped or feel like they're being run off the> > road.>> > I'd guess that a pack of 25 riders or less doesn't have this issue; it's the> > really large groups where this is more likely to happen. Any ride leaders> > out there with solutions to this (other than the r.b.r-standard that slower> > folk should get off the friggin road)?>> Here's what happened on one of our local group rides recently:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPRkJPHWPz4>> Although it's not exactly your scenario, it shows what can happen.> None of the injuries were too serious ....this time.

You should find whichever dumbass who was the first person to passthat guy on the right, and whoop his ass. If everyone had passed onthe left, you probably wouldn't have crashed. At least the guy youran into tried to do the right thing by holding his line whileeveryone swarmed around him.

Fred

== 4 of 6 ==Date: Tues, Sep 14 2010 9:11 pm From: DirtRoadie

On Sep 14, 9:10 pm, --D-y <dustoyev...@mac.com> wrote:> On Sep 14, 4:43 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <Mi...@ChainReaction.com>> wrote:>> > Impressive that rbr, when asked a serious question that many of us deal with> > on a regular basis, can really get behind it in a serious way. Thank you all> > for the thoughtful responses, and reminding me why I don't do large group> > rides anymore.>> > For the slower folk complaining about being scared when overtaken by a large> > group of cyclists, I'm suggesting they use ding-ding bells. I'm thinking the> > sound carries a fair amount and might warn people who can't see them (before> > it's too late) that there's something ahead to watch out for.>> > In the past, I've always assumed the ding-ding bells were to let others know> > you were passing them, but I'm seeing things a bit differently now. It's> > that last half of a large group that you have to be scared of.>> People in front need to point (up high) and vocalize-- "Riders Up!!!"> and swing wide in a safe manner while calling out "Passing on your> left, please!.> The people in the back need to keep their heads up and ears open, and> pass other riders with plenty of room to spare, not treat them like> pylons.>> Ride like a grown-up, including taking responsibility for others'> safety.

Nothing you have said is inaccurate but it does not fully reflect on"real world" group riding. Verbal commands, warnings, instructions,etc. often do not reach the back of the group or do not get there in atimely manner. At 25-30 mph a rider at the front may not even beheard by a rider just a few places back. At best that may meanseveral relays of info to reach the back. A second at 30 mph is 44feet. At worst the riders in the back NEVER get the info. Happens allthe time. We all have our vision of what we want other riders to doand how the group should "behave." And I don't think any halfwayserious rider wants a fixed-paced, half-assed processional withsomebody, however well intentioned, barking orders (been there, donethat). Part of the enjoyment is the dynamic, the constantly changingnature of the group, the changes in pace while maintaining flow,working cooperatively but challenging and pushing each other.Sometimes its nice to be able to converse with someone you have notseen since last week.month, sometimes it fun to beat up on them,knowing full well they are trying to do the same to you (and wishingthem well if they succeed.) It's a group effort, but it's individualas well.

To my way of thinking (which also fails to take into account therealities above) every rider needs to be dialed into that fact thatit's a group ride and maintain the mantra "_I_ need to make this abetter GROUP ride." A good ride is safe, it's fun, it's spirited andit's cooperative and probably competitive. And that is probably aboutthe proper order of priority.

Maybe that''s what you were saying.

Now how to accomplish this? In my experience It's good to have someguidance at the beginning of the ride "OK Here's the plan for theride..." And of course this is often immediately falls by thewayside.But a debriefing AFTER a ride can be very helpful too. This may evenbe the following week. "Last week we had an incident where ____crossed a double yellow line to pass everyone on the ____ descent andthere was an oncoming car. We need to avoid behavior like that bothbecause it's dangerous and it makes us look bad as a group."

I guess what I am describing is simply reinforcement of thosebehaviors (group and individual) we want to perpetuate anddisincentives for those we want to discourage.

Quite frankly I have NO interest whatsoever in riding with a groupthat does not have some basic communication mechanism, ideallybefore, during and after a ride.

That's my fantasy perfect world and as close-to-perfect-as-I-can-hope-for group ride.

DR

== 5 of 6 ==Date: Tues, Sep 14 2010 9:23 pm From: Brad Anders

Excellent observation on the whole "rider up" thing. There have beenaccidents on the Palo Alto Noon Ride in the past where a group of 50+is approaching a 40 mph sprint point, and they overtake a rider.Anyone who believes that there's any way to control that situationfrom the front is kidding themselves. IMO, a group of 50+ going over30 mph is pretty much unmanageable, and while 99% of the time you getlucky, it's that 1% that everyone remembers.

Brad Anders

== 6 of 6 ==Date: Tues, Sep 14 2010 10:17 pm From: DirtRoadie

On Sep 14, 10:23 pm, Brad Anders <pband...@gmail.com> wrote:> Excellent observation on the whole "rider up" thing. There have been> accidents on the Palo Alto Noon Ride in the past where a group of 50+> is approaching a 40 mph sprint point, and they overtake a rider.> Anyone who believes that there's any way to control that situation> from the front is kidding themselves. IMO, a group of 50+ going over> 30 mph is pretty much unmanageable, and while 99% of the time you get> lucky, it's that 1% that everyone remembers.>> Brad Anders

To add a simple point. My ideal group size is probably 12 or so.I have a number of reasons I base this on.A group of 12 can fly and is large enough so that someone whoprimarily wishes to "sit in" can do so. There is likely to be a muchmore even division of "work." In too large or small a group the pacemay be much faster (or slower, but probably faster ) than anyindividual is really seeking. With the "Goldilocks" group (just right)an individual can play a signifcant part in defining group pacewithout necessarily controlling it. In a smaller group an individualcan control it, sometimes to the detriment of others.Much bigger and a group becomes a "pack" independent of any of theindividuals involved.In a group of mostly well matched riders, a dropped rider can oftenregain the group.In a spirited group of 25 it's usually "sayonara."In a group of 12 it's easy to know who's there. I know I have beenwell into rides with much larger groups when I did the "Hey Joe! Ididn't know you were here tonight."In a large group any individual rider might never see the front for anentire ride. What fun is that?

Anyhow that's just more of my wishful thinking out loud for theperfect group in my perfect world.

On Sep 14, 9:15 am, mtb Dad <listerfar...@telus.net> wrote:>> Looks like they have some inspectors doing the right things:> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_tainted_eggs>> "Donations" to the UCI should be included in the category of 'doper> lobby'. And how about McQuaid getting the nod as Verbruggen's> appointed heir? Or clean docs like the Prentice getting shown the> door? Or no chaperones in the Tour until 2 years ago? In 08 TV crews> caught riders cyclocrossing across fields to avoid the first> chaperones. And penalties with teeth? Steroids got you a 10 minutes> penalty in the tour, when all other sports had 2 year suspension.

This doesn't even rise to the level of an argument.

The complaint Brad and I and others are making is thathaving the _Federal Government_ go after Dopestrong forlast decade's EPO use, USPS contract, and SCA testimony(the SCA case never should have been brought since therewas no anti-dope clause in SCA's insurance contract)is a waste of _Federal_ resources that should be appliedto something the FDA rightly regulates.

Your comment about Dopestrong donating money to the UCIis completely beside the point. If the UCI wants to be lenientor tough on dopers, that is cycling's internal business.The food-factory lobby influences Congress. The doper lobby,such as it is, only influences McQuaid. I don't really expect orneed McQuaid to look out for the safety of the egg-buying,amateur-racing public. Or to OMG THINK OF THE CHILDREN.

Doping is not a significantly greater moral issue than throwingspitballs in baseball, tackling with your head in football, orexcessively hard checks into the boards in hockey.All of these are sporting fouls and should be penalized withsporting penalties. Having the government investigate themas crimes is a waste of government resources and riskscriminalizing sporting rivalries.

It used to be that steroids got you a 10 minute penalty inthe Tour, and other sports may have had a longer suspension -but how many athletes ever got that long suspension, unlessthey were super high profile busts like Ben Johnson?Do you think soccer players are all clean as whistles?Cycling now has much stiffer penalties than 10 minutes,and doping hasn't decreased. So why do you think thatyet stiffer penalties are going to finally turn the tide ondoping? Listening to anti-dope crusaders is like hearingWestmoreland talk about body counts. At least Laffertyhas given up on the anti-dope pretense - he just wantsto see Armstrong rot in prison, and after that we can all besee-no-evil monkeys.

Fredmaster Ben

== 2 of 3 ==Date: Tues, Sep 14 2010 9:17 pm From: Brad Anders

On Sep 14, 9:00 pm, Fredmaster of Brainerd <bjwei...@gmail.com> wrote:> On Sep 14, 9:15 am, mtb Dad <listerfar...@telus.net> wrote:>>>> > Looks like they have some inspectors doing the right things:> >http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_tainted_eggs>> > "Donations" to the UCI should be included in the category of 'doper> > lobby'. And how about McQuaid getting the nod as Verbruggen's> > appointed heir? Or clean docs like the Prentice getting shown the> > door? Or no chaperones in the Tour until 2 years ago? In 08 TV crews> > caught riders cyclocrossing across fields to avoid the first> > chaperones. And penalties with teeth? Steroids got you a 10 minutes> > penalty in the tour, when all other sports had 2 year suspension.>> This doesn't even rise to the level of an argument.>> The complaint Brad and I and others are making is that> having the _Federal Government_ go after Dopestrong for> last decade's EPO use, USPS contract, and SCA testimony> (the SCA case never should have been brought since there> was no anti-dope clause in SCA's insurance contract)> is a waste of _Federal_ resources that should be applied> to something the FDA rightly regulates.>> Your comment about Dopestrong donating money to the UCI> is completely beside the point. If the UCI wants to be lenient> or tough on dopers, that is cycling's internal business.> The food-factory lobby influences Congress. The doper lobby,> such as it is, only influences McQuaid. I don't really expect or> need McQuaid to look out for the safety of the egg-buying,> amateur-racing public. Or to OMG THINK OF THE CHILDREN.>> Doping is not a significantly greater moral issue than throwing> spitballs in baseball, tackling with your head in football, or> excessively hard checks into the boards in hockey.> All of these are sporting fouls and should be penalized with> sporting penalties. Having the government investigate them> as crimes is a waste of government resources and risks> criminalizing sporting rivalries.>> It used to be that steroids got you a 10 minute penalty in> the Tour, and other sports may have had a longer suspension -> but how many athletes ever got that long suspension, unless> they were super high profile busts like Ben Johnson?> Do you think soccer players are all clean as whistles?> Cycling now has much stiffer penalties than 10 minutes,> and doping hasn't decreased. So why do you think that> yet stiffer penalties are going to finally turn the tide on> doping? Listening to anti-dope crusaders is like hearing> Westmoreland talk about body counts. At least Lafferty> has given up on the anti-dope pretense - he just wants> to see Armstrong rot in prison, and after that we can all be> see-no-evil monkeys.>> Fredmaster Ben

+1.

re: your 10 minute penalty comment: that's EXACTLY what we need to dofor doping offenses. IMO, the draconian 2-year penalty allows thedoper to disappear, and re-emerge (a la Vino) somewhat anew. Screwthat. Kill 'em for 10 min and make them finish the event to keep theirpro license. Hell, even better, in the GT's, make them wear the "dopejersey" for the rest of the event, so that fans know who to hurl eggsat.

> On Sep 14, 9:00 pm, Fredmaster of Brainerd <bjwei...@gmail.com> wrote:> > On Sep 14, 9:15 am, mtb Dad <listerfar...@telus.net> wrote:> >> >> >> > > Looks like they have some inspectors doing the right things:> > >http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_tainted_eggs> >> > > "Donations" to the UCI should be included in the category of 'doper> > > lobby'. And how about McQuaid getting the nod as Verbruggen's> > > appointed heir? Or clean docs like the Prentice getting shown the> > > door? Or no chaperones in the Tour until 2 years ago? In 08 TV crews> > > caught riders cyclocrossing across fields to avoid the first> > > chaperones. And penalties with teeth? Steroids got you a 10 minutes> > > penalty in the tour, when all other sports had 2 year suspension.> >> > This doesn't even rise to the level of an argument.> >> > The complaint Brad and I and others are making is that> > having the _Federal Government_ go after Dopestrong for> > last decade's EPO use, USPS contract, and SCA testimony> > (the SCA case never should have been brought since there> > was no anti-dope clause in SCA's insurance contract)> > is a waste of _Federal_ resources that should be applied> > to something the FDA rightly regulates.> >> > Your comment about Dopestrong donating money to the UCI> > is completely beside the point. If the UCI wants to be lenient> > or tough on dopers, that is cycling's internal business.> > The food-factory lobby influences Congress. The doper lobby,> > such as it is, only influences McQuaid. I don't really expect or> > need McQuaid to look out for the safety of the egg-buying,> > amateur-racing public. Or to OMG THINK OF THE CHILDREN.> >> > Doping is not a significantly greater moral issue than throwing> > spitballs in baseball, tackling with your head in football, or> > excessively hard checks into the boards in hockey.> > All of these are sporting fouls and should be penalized with> > sporting penalties. Having the government investigate them> > as crimes is a waste of government resources and risks> > criminalizing sporting rivalries.> >> > It used to be that steroids got you a 10 minute penalty in> > the Tour, and other sports may have had a longer suspension -> > but how many athletes ever got that long suspension, unless> > they were super high profile busts like Ben Johnson?> > Do you think soccer players are all clean as whistles?> > Cycling now has much stiffer penalties than 10 minutes,> > and doping hasn't decreased. So why do you think that> > yet stiffer penalties are going to finally turn the tide on> > doping? Listening to anti-dope crusaders is like hearing> > Westmoreland talk about body counts. At least Lafferty> > has given up on the anti-dope pretense - he just wants> > to see Armstrong rot in prison, and after that we can all be> > see-no-evil monkeys.> >> > Fredmaster Ben> > +1.

Ben's on a roll, as usual.

> re: your 10 minute penalty comment: that's EXACTLY what we need to do> for doping offenses. IMO, the draconian 2-year penalty allows the> doper to disappear, and re-emerge (a la Vino) somewhat anew. Screw> that. Kill 'em for 10 min and make them finish the event to keep their> pro license. Hell, even better, in the GT's, make them wear the "dope> jersey" for the rest of the event, so that fans know who to hurl eggs> at.

In some ways, making a rider that got caught wear a "doper's jersey" is bordering on the kind of thinking that had people in stocks back when. But you know, it has a certain appeal right now. I think you're absolutely right about the present long suspensions actually allowing a rider to do a form of PR in that the public generally will have forgotten what he'd done two years prior.

Abstract: If wood is treated with strong acid, carbohydrates are hydrolyzed and solubilized. The insoluble residue is by definition lignin and can be measured gravimetrically. The standard method of analysis requires samples of 1 or 2 g of wood or pulp. In research at this laboratory these amounts of sample are often not available for analytical determinations. Thus we developed a modification of the standard procedure suitable for much smaller sample amounts. The modification is based on the procedure of Saeman. Wood samples require extraction prior to lignin analysis to remove acid-insoluble extractives that will be measured as lignin. Usually this involves only a standard extraction with ethanol--benzene. However, woods high in tannin must also be subjected to extraction with alcohol. Pulps seldom require extraction.

Martin Luther King111 Inaugurates National Conference on Challenges Before Peace Activists and Constructive Workers .21 September 2010 : Gandhi Bhavan, ThiruvananthapuramThe Kerala Gandhi Smarak Nidhi in association with the Indian Council of Gandhian Studies( New Delhi) as a part of the former's Diamond Jubilee Yearlong Programmes is happy to announce a Two-Day National Conference on the theme:The Challenges Before Peace Activists and Constructive Workers from 21 September 2010.

The Conference will be inaugurated by the Honorable Martin Luther King 111 at Gandhi Bhavan Thiruvananthapuram at 2.30 PM on 21 September.The Two-day Conference will in three sessions deliberate some of the key issues confronting the peace activists,peace promoters,peace-builders and constructive workers in India.

The objective of this national exercise will be to promote and generate constructive and meaningful initiatives to usher in an atmosphere that will encourage the employment of Dialogue and Reconciliation as against the prevailing confrontations and violent culture which hampers development in all sense.Sessions will be guided by Senior Constructive Workers, Eminent Peace Activists and leading scholars and experts.Those who are interested in attending this Conference may contact the secretary, Kerala Gandhi Smarak Nidhi before 15 September at Keralagandhismaraknidhi@gmail.com or drnradhakrishnan@yahoo.com

Excellent Initiative by the Govt. of Karnataka in India to provide Good Governance through promtion of e-governance policies for the welfare & uplift of the people to create a progressive & humane more

-- Truth resides in every human heart, and one has to search for it there, and to be guided by truth as one sees it. But no one has a right to coerce others to act according to his own view of truth. - Mohandas Gandhi

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SAFE - Social Action Foundation for Equity" group. To post to this group, send email to socialactionfoundationforequity@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to socialactionfoundationforequity+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.co.in/group/socialactionfoundationforequity?hl=en?hl=en-GB

-- Truth resides in every human heart, and one has to search for it there, and to be guided by truth as one sees it. But no one has a right to coerce others to act according to his own view of truth. - Mohandas Gandhi

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SAFE - Social Action Foundation for Equity" group. To post to this group, send email to socialactionfoundationforequity@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to socialactionfoundationforequity+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.co.in/group/socialactionfoundationforequity?hl=en?hl=en-GB